You cannot do anything with the drive from a DTVPal other than use it to record and watch shows with a DTVPal. It uses a proprietary filesystem that nobody is willing to demystify, due to DMCA restrictions.

OK, it's good to hear that you've already done your homework on that matter. Have you decided w if you are going to replace your old TV or not? I think you will enjoy the experience a lot more if you do...

Oh I'd definetly replace the existing television with a new flat screen. And I'd take the advice that was also offered by someone here to make sure to get one with more jacks than you think you'll need so it's expandable with future devices.

The problem I have now is that I was doing some additional research on the boards of the Roku site and one of the sites that's a deal breaker for me is limited to folks with cable subscriptions. I was willing to cut the cord so long as my family could get ABCFamily through their site. But they've closed it to only folks with a cable subscription that can be verified which is so insanely stupid. To add insult to injury they don't even service Time Warner customers, one of the biggest cable providers in the country, which serves my area. So I need to think about it some more and/or possibly find someone who's willing to lend out their login/id from their provider. It's the stupidest thing I've ever seen a website do and I was so looking forward to telling the cable company to kiss my posteirer...

It comes from post #1055. I interpreted that to mean that you were connecting a drive to each of the USB ports. You did not, at the time, had a DVR+ with an internal drive, I think.

Anyway, the date on that post is 01-10-2014 so I had hoped that more than seven months later the revisions of the FW would have addressed the possibility of choosing one drive or the other for recording. Also, I had hoped that CM would have made it possible to access the recordings on both drives by, say, choosing a "source" drive. Alas, no, that's not the case. Or at least I could not find it in the menus.

But Pachinko confirmed these observations by talking to CM. Oh, well, let's hope they take this suggestion and act on it. Or do we have to contact them directly to request that?

I noted that CM-7400 (Enton) and new CM-7500 [DVR+] (echo*) are both utilize only one drive and behave same way when connecting second drive.
Yes, I did many tests include two USB drives and later did test combinations of int SATA and ext USB ...

Unfortunately for us, customers the two company made decision not in our favor: allow to use ONE drive regardless FW version.

The problem I have now is that I was doing some additional research on the boards of the Roku site and one of the sites that's a deal breaker for me is limited to folks with cable subscriptions. I was willing to cut the cord so long as my family could get ABCFamily through their site. But they've closed it to only folks with a cable subscription that can be verified which is so insanely stupid.

Would you be willing to pay $5, $8 or more per month just for ABCFamily? The "premium" movie channels would cost even more. (Just look at Amazon Prime or Vudu rates for an idea.) Now multiply that by the number of special-interest subscription TV channels. What would happen is two things: Many people would end up paying the same as they do for subscription TV, only with less channels, and many channels would simply disappear for lack of sufficient interest. The sports channels, in particular, would be in real trouble. They would cost many times what they do as part of a package, and there's some doubt even sports addicts would be willing to pay for them in sufficient numbers.

Channels like ABCFamily know this. The subscription TV (cable/satellite) providers know this. So the content providers sign deals with the subscription TV companies and each agrees to maintain the status quo.

Well, they say people from Channel Master read this, so: these features were standard issue on DVRs years and years ago, so we would all appreciate it if they were fast-tracked on the DVR+.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmup

Oh, well, let's hope they take this suggestion and act on it. Or do we have to contact them directly to request that?

I doubt you will see any substantial DVR-related features added to the DVR+ and should consider it feature-complete as it stands. I suspect future additions will be primarily directed at adding Internet streaming channels - just what everyone wants.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

I am trying to decide which model of CM to buy, the one with the internal 1 tb hdd (7500tb1) or the older one without the internal drive and use an external drive with it. It appears in various reviews that the two models are identical (other than the internal hdd inclusion). Has anyone had experience with both of these models and their responsiveness. Would an external hdd (usb) be slower than the internal drive?

1 TB is more than enough for me, so the option of using bigger drives is not really a consideration for me. I am just trying to decide if I would want a (less clunky) model with the drive already inside or a (more clunky) solution with a separate drive. Any comments or thoughts highly appreciated.

I am trying to decide which model of CM to buy, the one with the internal 1 tb hdd (7500tb1) or the older one without the internal drive and use an external drive with it. It appears in various reviews that the two models are identical (other than the internal hdd inclusion). Has anyone had experience with both of these models and their responsiveness. Would an external hdd (usb) be slower than the internal drive?

1 TB is more than enough for me, so the option of using bigger drives is not really a consideration for me. I am just trying to decide if I would want a (less clunky) model with the drive already inside or a (more clunky) solution with a separate drive. Any comments or thoughts highly appreciated.

Personally, I would go with the model that does not have the internal drive. For the price difference, you can easily purchase a 1TB external drive and still have some nice money left. Additionally, if the external hard drive does die on you, it's extremely easy to replace it. To replace the internal drive, you'll either have to send the unit back for repair or open the unit up yourself.

Additionally, if you're somewhat computer-savvy, with the external drive, you can copy the video files to your PC. (This has been discussed previously on this forum and involves some technical know-how.) Thus, if you think the hard drive is going flaky, you'll be able to back up your videos before the drive totally craps out. Fair warning, the filenames will have no correlation to the name of the show. So you'll have randomly-named files. OR, you could buy another drive, record to it, but use the original drive only for playing previously recorded shows, before the drive totally dies. FYI, the DVR+ can utilize only one hard drive at a time, so you'll need to plug and unplug whichever drive you want to use at that time.

The only upside I can see to the model with the internal drive is that it takes up less space on the shelf and you don't have an another cable laying getting in the way.

Would you be willing to pay $5, $8 or more per month just for ABCFamily? The "premium" movie channels would cost even more. (Just look at Amazon Prime or Vudu rates for an idea.) Now multiply that by the number of special-interest subscription TV channels. What would happen is two things: Many people would end up paying the same as they do for subscription TV, only with less channels, and many channels would simply disappear for lack of sufficient interest. The sports channels, in particular, would be in real trouble. They would cost many times what they do as part of a package, and there's some doubt even sports addicts would be willing to pay for them in sufficient numbers.

Channels like ABCFamily know this. The subscription TV (cable/satellite) providers know this. So the content providers sign deals with the subscription TV companies and each agrees to maintain the status quo.

But isnt it because of cable and satellite we have ABC and ABCFamily, FOX and FX and now FXX? There are many other media conglomerates that have multiple channels, these are only the most obvious. I would rather pay for a few channels of my choosing than 200+ a provider feels I should have. I only have basic cable so that I can watch a few programs on 10 channels and watch/record the broadcast stations OTA, so Im paying $7 per channel now.

But isnt it because of cable and satellite we have ABC and ABCFamily, FOX and FX and now FXX? There are many other media conglomerates that have multiple channels, these are only the most obvious. I would rather pay for a few channels of my choosing than 200+ a provider feels I should have. I only have basic cable so that I can watch a few programs on 10 channels and watch/record the broadcast stations OTA, so Im paying $7 per channel now.

There is a frequent "crawl" across the screen when watching local channels about the proposed legislation in congress to eliminate free OTA tv. Is there any discussion about that here? I thought there would be but I am obviously not using the proper search terms. I'd like to get more informed about this and, as I said, I thought there would be discussion somewhere here. Link?

Well that's my question. What legislation. As I interpret the messages it is not " to abolish OTA completely.". But rather it is to eliminate it being available for free. Somehow to be available only through the cable companies. I realize I am being nebulous about this but that just reflects my ignorance about the subject.

Well that's my question. What legislation. As I interpret the messages it is not " to abolish OTA completely.". But rather it is to eliminate it being available for free. Somehow to be available only through the cable companies. I realize I am being nebulous about this but that just reflects my ignorance about the subject.

I wasn't familiar with the legislation in question, but that article helps. If (what is now) OTA TV is made available only through the cable companies, or if cable companies are allowed to take over the advertising revenue, then free OTA TV has been effectively abolished. The programming that broadcasters transmit isn't owned by the broadcasters or by the cable companies; it's owned by the content creators and paid for by embedded advertising. Broadcasting is just a delivery system that competes with cable and Internet. Everything else is going wireless these days, which makes sense because wireless technology eliminates much costly infrastructure, so why would we want to eliminate the oldest wireless technology we have? Part of the current push is just a spectrum grab, and the rest is just cable companies trying to eliminate their competition. If broadcasters give up their licenses or have their licenses or their ad revenue stripped away somehow, they'll be left with nothing of real value.

There is a frequent "crawl" across the screen when watching local channels about the proposed legislation in congress to eliminate free OTA tv. Is there any discussion about that here? I thought there would be but I am obviously not using the proper search terms. I'd like to get more informed about this and, as I said, I thought there would be discussion somewhere here. Link?

First I'd love to see cable go ala-cart. There's so many channels now and seemingly less than ever that's worth watching. I live in the Dallas area and I can remember years ago when I lived in actual Dallas proper, the cable company actually would let you build your own package with channels you could select and those you could decline. Gosh I miss those days...

I think if consumers demanded ala-cart and the cable/satelite providers actually followed through (which I don't think they ever will...), then we'd find out very quickly which channels are really important enough to remain on and which are just showing crap and would fall by the wayside.

As far as this elimination of OTA channels, I'm sure the cable, satelite providers and contect creators would love to see this happen and if it's serious then they're probably behind it. Personally I doubt OTA will ever go away, but if cutting the cord seriously finds traction, I've heard about this jump of 44% as of late, then it'll lead to a vicious circle. Providers will both loose revenues and find it harder to negotiate with content creators. They'll inevitiably pass along the costs and more folks will just cut the cord only moving the circle further along. Content creators would concievably have to settle less cable companies drop them instantly limiting their reach.

Now I've heard for years and years that they'd like the consumer to go pay-per-view for their programming. Years ago it was through a set top box / descrambler but now I guess it could just be through your smart television that would descramble the signal. But you'd literally pay per episode of whatever program you wanted to watch similiar to how you rent something from Amazon or Itunes. Now that's something I cringe at when thinking about it.

I've read a lot of pages on this thread, but is the general consensus that the DVR+ is a good fit for OTA recording? I'm seeing a few issues, but no one is really bashing this.

I ask because after having a Tivo on monthly (and cancelling) and trying a Tablo (neat idea, buggy as all get out, not ready for prime time imho), followed by WMC (it's windows, so I have all those computer issues), I've reverted back to Tivo temporarily. I say temporarily not because I don't like Tivo, but because of the cost, and feeling like they were trapping me. When I cancelled, they offered a reduction in the monthly or a lifetime for $200. I said no at the time and the rep told me I could always reactivate at those prices. When I just reactivated, they offered the stock monthly ($15) and the lifetime was now $400! Complaining went nowhere. For that, I can get the DVR+ and pocket a few bucks (already have a portable hard drive).

I've read a lot of pages on this thread, but is the general consensus that the DVR+ is a good fit for OTA recording?

I don't know the general consensus however my take is if you are willing to give up a lot of features (of the DVRs you kicked to the curb) you can save a few bucks. As to those features it's more related to which are important to you... they are documented through-out the thread. As it comes across as bashing if one brings them up.

I've read a lot of pages on this thread, but is the general consensus that the DVR+ is a good fit for OTA recording? I'm seeing a few issues, but no one is really bashing this.

I ask because after having a Tivo on monthly (and cancelling) and trying a Tablo (neat idea, buggy as all get out, not ready for prime time imho), followed by WMC (it's windows, so I have all those computer issues), I've reverted back to Tivo temporarily. I say temporarily not because I don't like Tivo, but because of the cost, and feeling like they were trapping me. When I cancelled, they offered a reduction in the monthly or a lifetime for $200. I said no at the time and the rep told me I could always reactivate at those prices. When I just reactivated, they offered the stock monthly ($15) and the lifetime was now $400! Complaining went nowhere. For that, I can get the DVR+ and pocket a few bucks (already have a portable hard drive).

Thanks for any insights on this.

It's an excellent fit for OTA recording. Which is exactly what it was made for. There were some early glitches and issues. Many of those have cleared up with firmware updates. The latest firmware has been out for a while and seems to be pretty stable. Yeah, there's little things here and there that many of us wish it did better or differently. But those are pretty minor.

If you decide to buy a DVR+ and have any issues with it, contact tech support immediately. They are usually pretty good. While their 30-day return policy may be a bit shorter than ideal, from what people have reported, they don't give you a hard time at all about returns.

As to which hard drive to get, there's been reports of problems using Seagate 2TB drives. Stick with the 1TB or 3TB versions. Alternatively, a number of people have reported success with Western Digital drives. Passport Ultra drives, specifically, if memory serves me correct. Scan thru this forum for confirmation. If you already have a portable drive, you can try it and see what happens. The only gotcha is that the DVR+ will format your drive for Linux. If you want to use the hard drive on a Windows system afterwards, you'll need to re-format it, for Windows.

Another thing to think about is, from what I've read, that Tivo "lifetime" subscription is for the lifetime of the unit for which you bought it. NOT your lifetime. Pretty sucky if you ask me.

I have both Tivo. (feature packed) and the DVR+. The DVR+ is light on features and the "sexiness" that the Tivo has, BUT, by and large is a solid machine that will serve you well, at a much cheaper price. (wife prefers it over the Tivo).

Thanks guys. Yeah, the Tivo lifetime is for the lifetime of the unit itself only, which I agree, is a bit of a ripoff. Tivo itself is fine, although the features it provides are definitely overkill for OTA, at least for me. I'm just looking for something that will reliably record OTA and not require a lot of maintenance for a reasonable cost.

I did notice that a fair number of people were complaining about audio/video dropouts of several seconds throughout shows. Is this a known issue, or did they just get a drive that DVR+ doesn't like?

Anything that isn't a TiVo will probably require quite a bit of maintenance, because only TiVo offers name-based recording with the ability to only record new episodes. The DVR+ can record shows by name, but it will record repeats, too, so you'll potentially have to sift through a bunch of recordings to find the new episodes. By not spending the money on a TiVo, you're agreeing to manage your recording schedule yourself and adjust your timers as needed to deal with rescheduled shows, weeks without new episodes, and other scheduling irregularities. Regular DVR "maintenance" is part of the deal with time-based recording, regardless of which unit you buy.

Anything that isn't a TiVo will probably require quite a bit of maintenance, because only TiVo offers name-based recording with the ability to only record new episodes.

That's funny as WMC has been doing it for two years for me... unless I misunderstand.

Potentially more important than having to dig through repeats is the fact many new programs may not be recorded because it's recording repeats instead. Especially with only two tuners. Capturing the image I didn't know the show was going to be broadcast two nights next week.... another episode I would have missed.

That's funny as WMC has been doing it for two years for me... unless I misunderstand.

Potentially more important than having to dig through repeats is the fact many new programs may not be recorded because it's recording repeats instead. Especially with only two tuners.

Yeah, WMC does it, he was probably referring to dedicated PVR's. As far a maintenance, I'm ok with the repeat/delete thing, although not recording some new stuff might be an issue. What I was referring to was WMC being Windows based, there are updates to deal with, flaky behavior, sometimes crashing, just microsucks stuff in general, like all windows machines. Before someone chimes in about how wonderful WMC is, I've had it on a couple different computers/configurations with similar issues on all. But if it works for anyone, great, it's an option.

can you connect to the dvr's drive over the network as a share and offload/load/edit recordings yet?

it's ambiguous question
- do you mean : disconnect the drive from DVR+ and install it into NAS enclosure ? then yes
- or expose to network as sharing resource (say SAMBA) by unknown to us feature of DVR+ OS ? no one know if it possible

it's ambiguous question
- do you mean : disconnect the drive from DVR+ and install it into NAS enclosure ? then yes
- or expose to network as sharing resource (say SAMBA) by unknown to us feature of DVR+ OS ? no one know if it possible

If you read what I wrote it is not ambiguous at all.
Does the DVR+ expose its drive as a SMB/NFS share which can be accessed remotely?
Some sat DVR's have this typ of functionality and that is why I asked about this DVR.
It would be a very simple feature for the manufacturer to add to the device.
Simply enable a share using the built in networking protocols the OS supports.